Even scientists have admitted that the dating of fossils is faulty. I find it very confusing when I am told that we were once monkies, yet there are no fossils proving this. As someone said the make up of a monkey is close to ours, but still not the same.
44 comments
Another thing that puzzles me is that scientists try to tell us that humans existed at the same time dinosaurs did,
"Another thing that puzzles me is that scientists try to tell us that humans existed at the same time dinosaurs did, yet there is no mention of this in the Bible."
"Even scientists have admitted that the dating of fossils is faulty."I think most scientists in the field will admit that dating of fossils is inexact, but that does not mean "faulty."
"I find it very confusing when I am told that we were once monkies, yet there are no fossils proving this."
You should find such an asertion confusing because it is incorrect. Those who understand and accept the ToE assert that humans and monkeys share common ancestry, not that humans WERE monkeys. There is plenty of evidence, some of it in fossils, showing that monkeys and humans are related.
"As someone said the make up of a monkey is close to ours, but still not the same."
Of course it is not the same, we are RELATED to monkeys, were are not monkeys. That's why monkeys are called monkeys and we are called humans.
"Another thing that puzzles me is that scientists try to tell us that humans existed at the same time dinosaurs did, yet there is no mention of this in the Bible."
No, real scientists, as opposed to creationist "scientists," understand that dinosaurs died out millions and millions of years before humans evolved. The Bible doesn't mention dinosaurs because it was written starting several thousand years ago by human beings, long after the dinosaurs had died out. These authors had not idea that dinosaurs had EVER existed.
"I am sure as big and mean as they were, there would be a mention somewhere."
I know that not all dinosaurs were big, and I'm sure that not all of them were mean, however, I agree, if dinosaurs had existed when and where the Bible authors could have seen them they would have been mentioned in the Bible.
"I am also sure that IF they existed at the same time as man, that man would NOT be at the top of the food chain."
I agree. If significantly large, meat-eating dinosaurs had existed in the same time and area that humans existed, humans would not be a the top of the food chain, unles they had already developed weapons and group hunting tactics. All moot points as the dinosaurs had been extinct for millions of years before humans evolved.
"Also, if they existed where are they mentioned in all of the historical writings?"
That dinosaurs existed is well documented in science texts written since the dicovery and understanding of their fossils. There is no historical documentation of their existence at the same time as humans because they did not exist at the same time as humans.
"God Bless."
Uh huh. Thanks.
Every now and again a little education is called for, someone may learn something. (I know I have too much faith in fundie kind)!From this Website
And many Christians have admitted that the translation of the Bible through history is probably faulty as well. Would you like us to throw that out as well, or can we just pretend you never made your silly little statement in the first place.You can't prove Biblical creationism with logic. Don't even bother trying, it just makes you look like a moron.
Oh, and by the way. Go spend a weekend in the Alaskan Rockies with no modern technology. When that grizzly bear comes around your campsite, you tell him you're the "top of the food chain." Remember: today's moron is tomorrow's bear shit.
*facepalm*
Jesuslover: "And what's this I hear about scientists trying to tell us that humans existed at the same time dinosaurs did?"
... scientists try to tell us that humans existed at the same time dinosaurs did...
I'll give him credit for trying to apply logic to the obvious contradictions, but he's completely mixed up as to whom he's arguing with.NOT the case. My guess is that he really thinks that Kent Hovind and anyone else like him is a leading representative of scientists (*shudder*) it's the only way he could have gotten that kind of wrongheaded assumption, creating such a massive strawman.
Seriously, this is rich: a fundie berating science for a creationist assertion! If he finds out that he's actually arguing in favor of science, will he then recognize his correct orientation on this point (i.e., in favor of science) and continue to question the creation myth, or will he abandon science and change his arguments to support the literal story of Genesis? It depends on whether he has any intellectual honesty, I guess.
~David D.G.
when he says "Even scientists have admitted that the dating of fossils is faulty", i think hes refering to how something can be 5 million years old plus or minus 10,000 years. but then again, hes a fundie that doesnt understand big numbers, so he wouldnt see that as not being a big deal
Which scientists admitted that? Weren't they just saying that you can't pinpoint a certain year when you are looking at finds 250 000 years old, or 5 million years old.
No, we were not monkeys, monkeys are our cousins. Your cousin is not your great-great-great-grandfather, right? Same with monkeys and humans. Somewere in the past we had a common ancestor. Just like two brothers can move to different states and change their family name, our ancestors moved in diffferent surroundings, making them slowly more and more different. And now, a couple of million years later, we are different species. There are tons and tons of fossils proving this.
The drivel about dinosaurs and man living together is absolute bullshit. Dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, man is only a couple of hundred thousand years old.
No scientis has ever said that humans existed alongside dinosaurs, stupid. The dinosaurs died out 65 million years ago, the first proto-humans emerged some 2 million years ago. All the historical writings are done by humans, none of whom has co-existed with dinosaurs. They found the fossils sometimes, but thought they were dragons, monsters.
Show me one real scientist (not an idiot like Ham) who believes that humans and dinosaurs co-existed. Just one.
Oh, and the plural of monkey is monkeys, you cretin.
"As someone said the make up of a monkey is close to ours, but still not the same."
I didn't realize monkeys used cosmetics.
citation needed and even if radioactive dating is innacurate, that does not
and say what? mammals had barely emerged when the dinosaurs died, never mind man
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
